'Giving' baby to granny?

[Bestforbaby]

Bit of backstory: relationship breakdown, subsequent discovery of unplanned pregnancy which I have decided to keep. The father wants to be part of the baby's life when it arrives.

I am in London, and to carry on working in my field I need to stay in London. The father is also in London. I work fulltime, 8-7ish, plus some evenings and weekends. Giving up work/going part-time is not an option for financial reasons. I might be able to work from home a bit, but not sure yet.

I have been looking at London nurseries etc, fulltime care for the baby from about 12 weeks.

My parents live about 2 hours from London, and are retired. My mum offered yesterday to look after the baby fulltime during the week at their home. It is just too far for me to commute daily, I'd never see baby awake, and it would be nearly impossible for the father to have a relationship with the baby. Initially I thought she was mad, as I did not decide to keep the baby to never see it.

But then I thought maybe I am being selfish, and if the baby cannot have me 24/7, maybe it would be best to have my mum, rather than being one of many at a nursery. She was brilliant when I was little, and they have a big garden, parks nearby etc, and, most importantly, time. By being able to stay in a smaller flat and not paying childcare I'd be able to save up enough to do really nice things with the baby when we are together, whereas both living in London we are not going to have much (any) spare cash. Then when the baby is school-age the plan would be to come 'back' to London.

Just wondering if anyone had any experience of a similar situation, or bright ideas? I want to do the best I can for my baby (who doesn't?), and maybe that is not being with me at the moment

Attachment theory is not popular psychology. There is a huge amount of evidence that attachment to the mother in particular is crucial. Not only that the OP may well find that when her baby is born she just cannot face leaving him or her. I was pretty career obsessed before DS arrived and will have to go back to work when he is a few months old however I would do anything to avoid being apart from him as much described. Seriously look at your options - can you move out of London close to your parents and look for other work? Will th father contribute so you don't have to work such long hours? It is likely you will fall in love with your baby harder than you can ever imagine and suddenly alternatives that may seem unthinkable now are an option.

I think the MN understanding of attachment theory is not based on science.

the link provided above mentioned nothing of the how much time the women spent with their children yet posters seem to think it means that working women have less attached children and that this is damaging for their children.

oh and some of the research is based on the mothers assessment of attachment. not some unbiased, scientific measure.

the research is designed to be read by unbiased academics who understand what they are reading and what it really means. and what it does not mean.

of course journalists convert it into newspaper headlines and people use it to sell books - believe that if you want to but stop telling other women things as facts which are not.

All good ideas, best. FWIW it's worth I think you are doing a great thing. Yes, your pg might not be ideal timing and your job still has a good few years of hardwork to go, but you are thinking this though and trying to do the best for everyone.

I do echo what I said above about trying to nail things down properly with the father re contact and finances, though.

You're going to be a great mum BestforBaby and the gran is already in my opinion the best grandparent you could ever wish for. How wonderful for this as yet unborn baby, to start life with 2 wonderful main carers, mum and gran, plus I guess grandad too and hopefully dad. Keep open as many options as you can for all of you. I wish you all the best for your futures. Oh yes and once your baby is born, it's funny how your priorities change!

''There is a huge amount of evidence that attachment to the mother in particular is crucial. ''

This is an example of what I mean by interpretations of psychological theory being bollocks.

When researchers conduct studies and peers review it they always come up with criticisms of the study. Where it is weak. What could be improved.
Most studies into attachment theory are conducted on mothers because mostly it is mothers who are primary care givers. Also the vast majority of participants in attachment theory studies are white ethnic european or american where the set up is commonly SAHM. Quite a lot of them are psychology students or mates of psychology students! There is very little data on other set ups. (unless there's been tonnes and tonnes and tonnes of research done in the last 10 years.) When studying attachment this is considered a weakness in the research and area that requires further investigation.

Secure attachment to at least one caregiver is considered good. That it has to be the mother is bollocks. That it can only be one person is bollocks.

what about saving all your holiday and booking one day a week, so you can effectively have a 3 day weekend for afew months after maternity leave?

Op - I just want to add a few things. My dh worked away when ds was a baby, I only worked 2 days a week and it was knackering. You have to add on getting baby ready, and taking to nursery as well as collecting from nursery after work. Then lots to do when you get in on top of broken sleep at night. I don't mean to sound all doom and gloom, but you need to have as much information as you can to base your decisions on.
Maybe you could go to your parents on a Saturday/ Sunday and commute to work Monday? If your mum was happy to do a couple of nights and bring baby back to you, you would have half the week covered. You need to discuss when your ex will have access and find out if his parents want to be involved possibly?
I would say consider all options carefully and don't back yourself into a corner. You are allowed to change your mind.

What 7to25 says is spot on.

OP, your mother may be confident now, but it's probably decades since she looked after a baby. Also, she is obviously a lovely supportive mum who wants to help you as much as she can as she sees you in this difficult situation. Just because someone offers help doesn't automatically mean it's OK to take it.

Having had my first baby just under 3 years ago, and with another one on the way now, I can tell you not only that it's so much harder than I expected, but also that my mum (and my partner's mum) have visibly been taken aback by how tough it is. Hence not asking either of them to take the baby for more than a few hours at a time. It's just not fair, no matter how lovely, sensible, and confident your mother is.

Why you would decide to 'keep' your baby and then go back to working those ridiculous hours after 12 weeks I have
no idea. Your lifestyle has really got to fit around your child and you don't seem to be prepared to personally adapt to that. If your mother has your child you will be carrying on as you did before, especially if you work weekends.

I speak as someone who had children later in life with a full-on successful career. Now a single parent, I moved out of London, have reduced my working hours and earn tens of thousands less. You don't actually need to earn that much money to provide a happy home for a child. To put your heart and soul into a career so you can pay for school trips (for which you only have to make a voluntary contribution) shows you have your priorities all wrong.

The whole set up would be slightly different if you lived with/close to your parents. I am hoping you will feel
differently when your baby arrives.

My SIL worked and studied ft from her youngest was 12 weeks and my MIL looked after her along with her DP. She went back to her mum, dad and sisters on the weekend the rest of the time she was with MIL, overnight too.

It was fine until MIL who was sick with a long term condition died suddenly. The sleepless nights and lack of rest time had taken its toll. It is a lot for an older person to manage. My eldest didn't sleep through the night until 2 and woke every hour at 12 weeks. You will not necessarily have a good sleeper.

I think to have your baby with family who will have a long term attachment to your baby is preferable to a nursery with several staff who are doing a job (all be it well, but not the same level of attention as a granny who dotes on them). If you can go part time until the baby is weaning and communicating more, that would be better. If your mum could come to you two days then maybe the father or a childminder could have the baby for one day, you could work 3 days. Then maybe once baby is older, if your mum can cope she could take the baby to hers on the last two days and you go ft, or the childminder could have the baby for 3 days.

Justgivemeareason, I am not quite sure how you have got the impression I am not prepared to personally adapt my lifestyle. I know my current lifestyle is not childfriendly, it does not need to be, as I do not have a child. I really have been taking everyone's comments on board. I know I will have to cut down my hours etc. I just don't see how some of the suggestions (giving up working completely, for example) would work for us longterm.

It seems to me that if my mother says she is happy to do 24/5 care, if I take her up on the option of doing, say, 2 days of care, with me there for the evening and doing nightwakings etc I am not exploiting her in any way. I am certain my mother would feel able to tell me if the two days of care, after a short trial, was not working out for her. I am not going to force her to do something that she does not want to do, or which will damage her health. When I do go back fulltime I will obviously have to find alternatives for the other days, from what you all say, a CM is the best option until a bit older. Anotherstitchintime, "If your mum could come to you two days then maybe the father or a childminder could have the baby for one day, you could work 3 days" this sounds like a great starting point to me. But if it does not work, I will of course change things.

I agree with Tweazel who posted earlier that it was sad that so many women are still put in this position when men are not. What makes me angry about this kind of situation is that so often, the default assumption is that the employer will get what they want, and everything else - the needs of a small child, the work/life balance of the parent, the economic needs of both parents - will take second place to that. I am very aware that at the moment it's an employer's market, but I really think this is where some challenging needs to be done.

OP, do you really love your job? Sorry if you have said so somewhere, and I've missed it. I've seen you say that you can't afford to give up work (fair enough) that you don't want to end up with a rubbish dead-end job after years of training (also fair enough) and that you think your work has the potential to become family-friendly (hmm).

I'll be honest. What you have said about your workplace doesn't make it sound family-friendly. It doesn't even make it sound person-friendly. You have said you work 8-7 daily, plus 'some evenings (as if 7pm isn't the evening - it is) and weekends'. That sounds absolutely exhausting. When, as it is, do you get any time for you? How do you juggle seeing friends, family, leisure time, holidays, just down time in front of the TV? You are already running on narrow margins, and now a baby is going to explode - as someone said - like a grenade into this setup. Even if the baby spends Mon-Fri with your mum, you doing the care on weekends will mean you have even less sleep and free time than before. It sounds massively stressful for you to the point of unworkability. And you aren't even going to get good maternity benefits out of it, so are going to have to contemplate going back at 3 months. I think you are getting a very rough deal here from your employer.

So, how much do you love your job - I mean the exact job you are doing now? How long have you been with your present organisation? Do they appreciate loyalty or do they boot people out of the door who can't put in 11 hours a day for a while? What other women in your organisation have had children and how have they handled it? You mentioned someone who works remotely one day a week, I think - go and speak to her and ask about how she negotiated around this. Look at anyone who has cut their hours down and ask how it works for them. You need to go to your employer and prepare a case for them backing off and accepting something like a more reasonable working week from you - one where you are working more like 9 to 5 than 8-7, and where your weekend working is an occasional thing only. And you need to make them believe that all this is worthwhile to keep you and your expertise and commitment.

If you really think that isn't going to fly (and you have said you work in a very male-dominated environment) then I think you need a Plan B where you start preparing, right now, for a move into a decent job somewhere else, or into self-employment earlier than might perhaps be ideal. Because as so many posters have said, you can't predict how this is going to work in practice when the baby arrives, and you are already at what sounds like full stretch now. Start thinking about what jobs are available elsewhere, whether there are comparable careers you could move sideways into, etc.

I don't want to say 'you must give up work' because I myself have a demanding job that I love and still work FT - but my employer is supportive and family-friendly. That is what's missing from your set up. there is very little sense that the employer will give a lot - you've talked about doing compressed hours (HOW, when you already work an 11-hour day??) and/or fewer days a week, but I think a more fundamental change in the psychological contract (as well as the literal one) between you and your employer is needed.

You said of your mum that she 'has said already that she would definitely not be prepared to take fulltime sole charge of an active toddler, but is confident about a baby'. So the granny solution is only actually workable for 12-18 months anyway. Get started on addressing the work issue now, for your benefit as well as your baby's.

For those saying attachment theory is rubbish or pop psychology - it's not. A HUGE amount of research has been done on attachment, and it is bollocks to say it is all based on mothers or SAHM Attachment to fathers, siblings, grandparents, nursery staff, teachers, children in Kibbutz, attachment cross culturally - all been studied in depth over 6 decades now.

then why does no one on MN never link to the research you are talking about?

why do MNers always link to research that does not say what they think it says?

you know what!?! why don't you link to the research you are referring to?

Is there something particular you are interested in? The body of research on attachment is pretty huge. Did you find my link to fathers and attachment earlier helpful?

What would you like - nurseries? Kibbutz? Cross-cultural?

research to back up this claim:

''There is a huge amount of evidence that attachment to the mother in particular is crucial. ''

There isn't any evidence to back up that claim. There is a huge amount of evidence that at least one secure attachment in infancy is crucial, but it doesn't have to be the mother - it just needs to be someone consistent, emotionally responsive and available to the infant.

In the 50s and 60s mother and "mother substitute" were used to describe the role of the attachment figure. A grandmother or father are equally good primary attachment figures if the actual mother isn't available for some reason.

I agree with this post maja00 Thu 01-Aug-13 12:48:30.

but that is not what posters say attachment theory is

Most of the research available is based on the mother child dynamic, purely because its usually the mother that is the primary caregiver. This does not, in any way, mean that the mother child dynamic is the only one that matters, or that it is the most important one.
Attachment theory states an infant needs a secure loving relationship to a primary caregiver. This can be anyone, in theory. It does not mean that that caregiver needs to be with the infant 24/7.

Seriously, there should be a ban on advising people on things like attachment theory unless you have at least a degree in psychology or a relevant discipline.

I would let your mother have the baby while you work. I know a couple of people who have done this and it has worked well and the child is well adjusted despite the parents working all hours. I would not leave a young baby in nursery for those long hours personally. Your mother sounds a good option but I really would try to cut your hours down for the sake of you spending more time with your child. You may feel very different when the baby is actually here.

annabelle - one of my oldest friends is soon to be a Professor - of Developmental Psychology. how babies and children's brains develop. she flies the world presenting to other people who have spent their working lives in this field.

journalists/authors/MNer talk like they know more than her. she says it is very hard to study babies brains. there are tests you can do - but they cannot be 100% sure.

That caregiver doesn't need to be with the infant 24/7, but they do need to be accessible. The OP working 8-7 plus some evenings and weekends, with various inconsistent nursery nurses providing Mon-Fri care and maybe a visit to dad at the weekend doesn't sound like a set-up which would make an attachment easy to form - especially if the OP goes back to work before the baby has become securely attached to her.

Taking a longer maternity leave or going back part time til 9 months, cutting down work hours and losing the evening/weekend work, and a childminder to provide childcare sounds much better. Either that or the grandmother caring for the baby Mon-Fri sound like much better set-ups imo.

Hiya just caught up on this thread.

I was working similar hours to you OP, and when I got pregnant I imagined going back at 16weeks to the same thing. I accepted redundancy at 38w, and to be honest its been a good thing. Giving me space to enjoy time with the baby and for the hormones and initial strong attachment to die down a bit. I will be getting another job; almost certainly full time, baby in nursery but I have decided to wait till she is a year old, because I can (financially) and now I am already on an enforced (redundant) career break I may as well enjoy this time (plus this is the perfect summer for mat leave - the weather is amazing!).

In your situation, as other posters have said, do your utmost to maximise the initial mat leave, use savings, borrow from caring family, whatever - give yourself a chance to get over the birth, get a sleep routine (well, try anyway) and go back fit and well - I would actually have hated working on 6+ wake ups a night from the early days as I would think I might not be on top form and that might be ''career limiting'' in the longer run. I enjoyed being perceived as great at my job and wouldn't want to lose that.

Once you go back, suggestions from other posters about keeping as many options as possible open is excellent, you can then decide whether you can/want to keep it up or not once you see the reality. If you do stick at it, perhaps agree with your mum up front when you will introduce a nursery - be that 12m, 18m or whatever so she/you have a clear end in sight. I was surprised how unique even a tiny baby personality is. I seem to have a happy cuddly one - and in fairness, I suspect she would love and cuddle anyone who offered her love and cuddles. Your's might be like this, or might have indigestion and colic all night every night and be a bit harder work - which would be hard for you and your mum.

Just keep in mind, whatever option you take you won't know what the alternatives would have been like anyway, so will be the right decision for you :-)

Good luck BestforBaby